Patterns of a western instigated and engineered color revolution strategy are being clearly seen in developments in Ukraine and are part of the US/NATO strategy of expansion towards the East with the goal of reaching Russian borders on all sides. In light of the 15 year anniversary of the beginning of NATO aggression against Serbia and Montenegro, March 24, 1999, the Voice of Russia spoke to the last Foreign Minister of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Živadin Jovanović who spoke about these issues and the correlations that are now occurring in Ukraine.

Our interview took place in light of the 15 year anniversary of the beginning of NATO aggression against Serbia and Montenegro which occurred on March 24, 1999. FM Jovanović says that what we have seen in Serbia, Ukraine and scores of other countries is illegal under international law and the UN Charter. He also says the instruments that US/NATO use are wide and varied but include organizations such as USAID, the IMF, the World Bank and other supposedly “neutral” bodies. The Honorable Jovanović believes that Serbia should remain militarily neutral do more to expand cooperation with Russia, China, India and the BRICS countries as well as countries which never attach political or military conditions to economic, technological or financial cooperation.

This is John Robles, I’m speaking with Živadin Jovanović. He is the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia and the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. This is part 3 of an interview in progress. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com.

Jovanović: Most thinking people in Europe and the world would have their own assessments of events in Ukraine. As far as I'm concerned I think it is a repetition of the colored revolutions, so called “color revolutions”. And some of the elements of the patterns that I have previously elaborated on are being clearly seen in developments in Ukraine.

But perhaps, I would like, first of all to say that; it is part of the Western strategy of expansion towards the East. It is indeed to my profound believe the part of strategy to reach Russian borders.

And well, they are abusing social, economic and other problems which partly resulted from their strategies and their policies of crediting or not crediting, policies implemented through IMF and World Bank, through European Banks and so on. Sometimes I believe that they make people hungry in order to finish their strategy. They are abusing social and economic problems for the strategic purposes.

I mentioned the American strategy to project the situation in nowadays Europe at the time when Roman Empire was at a peek of force and you can see this strategy having been expanded. I think perhaps the reason is that Russia is still not strong enough to resist and sometimes I think they are in a hurry to finish their expansion toward the East before Russia fully assumes its own capacities and its own objectives. They are really with itchy hands.

They want to show strength at the time when they are in a profound crisis and it is a crisis that is the deepest since the ‘30s of the last century.

They are abusing the national composition of the population of Ukraine, abusing the fact that part of the population is buying ideas of better life through the EU, through the agreement of association and stabilization and so on and so forth.

I would like to say, speaking about dangers, really you see how much money and energy is wasted on revision of history. Now this year we are marking 100 years since the beginning of the first world war, and there is a hyper production of false explanation of the real causes of the first world war. In Germany, Austria, France, Great Britain most of the books printed on the occasion of 100 years of the first world war accuse Serbia and Russia as being culprits of the first world war.

We now on a minor plan let me say that events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the destabilization of Bosnia and Herzegovina right now, was a reason for some European politicians, for the high international representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Valentine Inzko, to say: “Austria will dispose more military force in Bosnia. Austria will bring more policemen in Bosnia and will arrange a judiciary of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”

Nobody really understands that in terms of political strategy there are no differences between the EU and NATO, no differences between the EU and the US. Sometimes they spit at each other and sometimes they do nasty things to their partners, like spying on them, like listening and so on. But there is no difference in political strategy and the aims of the EU and NATO, between the EU and USA. All is coordinated, still showing that the strongest European power is the US.

So we see that in one hand the West is declaring that they support peaceful demonstrations and the right of people to express their democratic will and they are pumping million of dollars and even armaments, into opposition, into extremists who occupy (physically) institutions of Ukraine and Kiev and so on.

So this is an example where the West shows its cynicism and let's say immorality. Sometimes when we see what they do and what they talk, I ask myself what happened with the western civilization indeed? Can they be stable and progressive if they are abusing other nations, if they are so bluntly exploiting others and manipulating their own citizens, own allies and so on.

I said once: “If they don't know really where are the causes of their economic and financial crisis (of course they do know, but if they don't know) they should see in their immorality. Because you cannot play democracy inside and use only force outside your country.

Robles: To be honest I think it is a dying empire.

Jovanović: I see. If, let's say in my opinion I'm correct, that NATO aggression 15 years ago against Yugoslavia was a turning point toward the globalization of interventionism...

Robles: You are exactly correct..

Jovanović:I think that now we have reached the other turning point: this is the end of a unipolar world. And multi-polarity is not just an idea any longer, it is a reality, perhaps not in a full swing, not with a full force and not with full effects but we are witnessing the end of unipolar world relations and the beginning of a multi-polar world.

If the aggression in 1999 was towards domination and towards interventionism, towards totalitarian imperialism, then cases of reaching agreements about the nuclear energy of Iran, reaching some agreement on the Syrian conflict and now the events in Ukraine, are turning points towards multi-polarization which cannot be stopped.

And as far as NATO is concerned, NATO is fighting a lost war. Nobody can stop multi-polarization. And nobody can stop democratization which will be opened with full multi-polarization.

It is necessary to, let's say, do much more in the field of information (dissemination) that this knowledge of a few about what kind of world we live in today becomes the property of billions of the world’s population and the more we do in that direction, objectively informing the world community about these tectonic changes in world relations, I think the more secure our future will be. If we miss (the opportunity) to do so, if we miss doing something which must be done today, it might be really late.

I would like to say, speaking about dangers, really you see how much money and energy is wasted on revision of history. Now this year we are marking 100 years since the beginning of the first world war, and there is a hyper production of false explanation of the real causes of the first world war. In Germany, Austria, France, Great Britain most of the books printed on the occasion of 100 years of the first world war accuse Serbia and Russia as being culprits of the first world war.

We now on a minor plan let me say that events in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the destabilization of Bosnia and Herzegovina right now, was a reason for some European politicians, for the high international representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Valentine Inzko, to say: “Austria will dispose more military force in Bosnia. Austria will bring more policemen in Bosnia and will arrange a judiciary of Bosnia and Herzegovina.”

I really see that he himself may have not intention, but why Austria? Austria was occupying force in 1908, Austria occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1914, Austro-Hungaria – they started the first world war from Bosnia attacking Serbia. And now Inzko is advocating more Austrian soldiers in Bosnia and Herzegovina, more policemen and so on. Is it the way to export democracy, to make Bosnia and Herzegovina a functional state, a ripe candidate for membership in NATO or the EU? Sometimes I think they are really wrong.

I think we have enough facts to analyze NATO strategy, we don't really have always to go back to history and to enter the risk of being accused of this or that theory.

What is sure: NATO adopted in 2010 in Lisbon a new strategy plan for the next 20 years, that means until 2020 and it proclaimed the right to globally intervene. At that summit the EU was represented, Russia also, I think president Medvedev was at that summit also,

Robles: Yes, yes.

Jovanović: …but the European Union accepted NATO strategy in Europe as its own strategy. And we see equal strategy of NATO and EU when it comes to the globalization of interventionism, when it comes to expansion towards the East, when it comes to color revolutions and so on and so forth, even when it comes to constructing new anti-ballistic systems “so called” in so many countries in Europe. You know, it is not only Romania and Poland. It also Germany, it is even Spain and some other countries in Europe which accepted these anti-ballistic systems and they are preparing for something. We should be asking: what for?

We are seeing a revision of history and a revision of history, my friend, is just the first stage of the strategy of “revision of borders”. We should not be so naïve to say revision of history is a theoretic (or something like that) issue or problem. When somebody asks for a revision of let's say the Trianon Agreement from 1920, he is asking for changes of the borders of Hungary, Austria, or a changing of the borders of Serbia and so on and so forth.

So then we should be asking: Could a change of borders happen without wars? Are nations ready to agree with changes of the borders? I believe they are not ready and if they are not ready, what is next?

NATO is actually that machinery to rearrange, to redraw the borders in Europe. Should we disregard Brezhinsky's theory that Russia should be divided at least in three parts? Who is to divide? How to divide? Why to divide?

So, we see the strategy of NATO, which is actually defending the military industrial complex and the interests of corporate capital.

NATO leaders, especially American and the others, they are talking about spreading democracy, spreading human rights and so on and so forth and I'm curious how many people believe in this theory.

They actually are trying to put under their control the natural, economic and market resources of the planet to serve their interests, their greedy selfish interests. And this is all that NATO is for.

And having regard, that NATO is a military alliance to conquer other countries, to conquer resources and so on, I wonder if some countries of Europe should join NATO at all.

For example Serbia is pressed to join NATO. Every couple of months the highest officials of NATO send public messages: Serbia is welcomed! Serbia should know what to do! And so on. And actually they are inviting Serbia to submit official requests for membership in NATO.

It is my opinion that NATO is not a place for Serbia. NATO is a conquering organization, an imperialistic organization, an organization which aims to conquer other countries' and other peoples' resources to make other nations' lives miserable, and Serbia (on the other side) is a small European country, a peace loving country, which never has been linked with any imperial policies and so on.

Finally Serbia never was a member of any military alliance in its history. The longest period of peace Serbia lived through being neutral and being nonaligned. And finally to end: it is not to be neglected that NATO in 1999 during aggression they killed about 4,000 people of my country, they seriously wounded about 10,000, they destroyed civil infrastructure and civil economy at a value of $120 billion which was never recovered, nobody is even demanding or asking this to be done. And this is one additional reason why NATO cannot be a place for Serbia.

Serbia in my opinion, should remain militarily neutral and should conduct balanced foreign policy to remain open for cooperation with the EU, with the West in general, but on the basis of mutual interests, on the basis of respect of territorial integrity and sovereignty, on the basis of respect of independence and at the same time Serbia should do much more to expand cooperation with Russia first of all, then with China, then with India and with the BRICS countries in general, with all the countries who never advance any political strings to economic, technological or financial cooperation.

In my opinion this is good for the stability of Serbia, for the prosperity of Serbia and this is good for the stability of one “very unstable region” as the Balkans continue to be.

You were listening to part 3 of an interview with Živadin Jovanović, the former Foreign Minister of Yugoslavia. He is also the Chairman of the Belgrade Forum for a World of Equals. You can find the rest of this interview on our website at voiceofrussia.com. And as always we wish you the best wherever in the world you may be.

All rights reserved. The use of any material or its part from this website and quoting in mass media requires appropriate credit and a link to the web page where the information was taken from. Contact: world@ruvr.ru